ERIC ED603427: Factors Determining the Knowledge Sharing Practices among Graduate Students in Kerala: An Empirical Analysis

2019·0.36 MB·English

by  ERIC

Factors Determining the Knowledge Sharing Practices among Graduate Students in
Kerala: An Empirical Analysis
Dr. Santhosh Areekkuzhiyil,
Asst. Professor,
Govt. College of Teacher Education, Kozhikode, Kerala
[email protected]
9447847053

Abstract
The present study has been carried out with the objective of identifying the various factors
determining the knowledge sharing practices of graduate students. The study is an empirical
one and employed cross-sectional study design. The data required for the study has been
collected from a representative sample of 400 graduate students studying in various higher
education institutions in the state of Kerala by administering the knowledge sharing practices
scale. The study identifies the various factors determining their knowledge sharing practices
by employing factor analysis.
Key Words: Knowledge Sharing Practices; Graduate Students; Factor Analysis

Published in the Journal of Extension and Research, Vol: 19 (1&2). Pp75-89, 2019

Cite this paper as:
Areekkuzhiyil, Santhosh. (2019). Factors Determining the Knowledge Sharing
Practices among Graduate Students in Kerala: An Empirical Analysis. Journal
of Extension and Research, Vol: 19 (1&2). Pp75-89.

1. The context of the Study
Knowledge is a social phenomenon (Brown and Duguid, 2002) and hence it involves people.
Knowledge is comprised of experience, values, contextual information, and insights acquired
through experience. Together, these serve all as a basis for evaluation and integration of new
information and experience. Knowledge is created and implemented in the brain of a person.
In organisations, knowledge is incorporated into documents, databases, business procedures
and organisational norms (Davenport and Prusak, 2000). Areekkuzhiyil (2016) asserts,
knowledge can be regarded as the only unique resource that grows when shared, transferred,
and managed skillfully. Knowledge is one of the most important intangible assets possessed
by human beings. Unlike other finite resources like land, capital and labour, knowledge is an
infinite resource that can generate increasing returns through its systematic use and
application. In the 21st century, knowledge is being considered to be the primary production
resource and managing knowledge is the main focus of modern organisations.
Knowledge sharing can define as a social interaction culture, involving the exchange of
individual knowledge, experiences, and skills through the whole organisation. Knowledge
sharing comprises a set of shared understandings related to providing employees access to
relevant information and building and using knowledge networks within organisations (Hogel
et al., 2003).
Enabling efficient knowledge sharing is not easy. The challenges are often related to
motivating people to share knowledge, identifying the key people to share their knowledge,
organizing the existing knowledge and making knowledge easily accessible (Logan, 2006).
Knowledge sharing behaviour is able to provide opportunities to equip academics not only
with knowledge but also skills and professionalism to meet the requirements of human
resources in achieving a knowledge-based economy. However, one of the significant barriers
preventing individuals sharing knowledge is insufficient motivation or lack of reward, either
monetary or non-monetary (Azudin, Ismail and Taherali, 2009)
2. Knowledge Sharing Practices- An Overview
Knowledge Sharing is defined as a complex and dynamic exchange occurring through a
relationship between two actors. This process involves both “enquiring and contributing to
knowledge through activities such as learning by observation, listening and asking, sharing
ideas, giving advice, recognizing cues, and adopting patterns of behaviour” (Bosua and
Scheepers, 2007). It is the exchange of knowledge between at least two parties in a reciprocal
process allowing reshaping and sense-making of the knowledge in the new context (Willem,
2002). Knowledge sharing is the process intended at exploiting existing knowledge,
identifying existing and accessible knowledge, in order to transfer and apply this knowledge
to solve specific tasks better, faster and cheaper than they would otherwise have been solved
(Christensen, 2007). It includes the exchange of ideas, information, experience or expertise
between individuals. In the present study knowledge sharing practices has been assessed
using the knowledge sharing practices scale. Greater scores in the knowledge sharing
practices scale indicate a higher level of knowledge sharing.
3. The objective of the Study
The objective of the study is to analyse and identify the factors determining the knowledge
sharing practice among the under graduate students in Kerala.
4. Methodology
The study is an empirical one. The study is based on primary data. Cross-sectional study
design has been used for the study. Stratified sampling technique has been employed to select
the required sample. While selecting sample due considerations has been given to (i) type of
the Institution and (ii) stream of course of the respondents. The sample size selected for the
study is 400 under graduate students of various institutions of higher education in the state of
Kerala.
5. Tool Used for Data Collection
The primary data required for the study has been collected with the help of Knowledge
Sharing Practices Scale (Areekkuzhiyil, 2018). Knowledge sharing practices scale is a Likert
type five-point scale which includes items to assess the different dimensions of knowledge
sharing practices of students. The convergent validity and discriminant validity of the
various constructs of the knowledge sharing practice scale is above the accepted level. The
Cronbach’s alpha is found to be 0.938 and composite reliability is 0.928 for the knowledge
sharing practices scale.
6. Results and Discussion
Exploratory factors analysis has been performed to classify the items into different groups.
Principal component analysis (PCA) method was selected to generate the initial solutions for
the EFA. Table 1 indicates that the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling
adequacy worked out to 0.747, clearly establishing the reliability of the constructs (Malhotra,
2007) and indicate that the relationship with the items is statistically significant and is
suitable for EFA to provide the parsimonious set of factors (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
The Bartlett’s test of sphericity is significant which indicates that the correlation among the
measurement items is higher than 0.3 and are suitable for EFA (Hair et al., 2006). Table 2
presents the information of communalities explained by each item.
Table 1: KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. 0.747
Approx. Chi-Square 3413.636
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Df 561
Sig. 0.000

Table 2: Communalities Shared by Individual Items
item Initial Extraction item Initial Extraction item Initial Extraction
1 1.000 0.637 12 1.000 0.622 23 1.000 0.754
2 1.000 0.628 13 1.000 0.725 24 1.000 0.751
3 1.000 0.490 14 1.000 0.499 25 1.000 0.641
4 1.000 0.609 15 1.000 0.587 26 1.000 0.645
5 1.000 0.607 16 1.000 0.408 27 1.000 0.594
6 1.000 0.538 17 1.000 0.523 28 1.000 0.731
7 1.000 0.699 18 1.000 0.467 29 1.000 0.688
8 1.000 0.574 19 1.000 0.564 30 1.000 0.446
9 1.000 0.458 20 1.000 0.632 31 1.000 0.580
10 1.000 0.609 21 1.000 0.689 32 1.000 0.615
11 1.000 0.551 22 1.000 0.520 33 1.000 0.536
34 1.000 0.584
Table 3: Total Variance Explained of Knowledge Sharing Practices
Initial Eigen Values
Components
Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1. Attitude and Willingness to Learn (AWL) 5.207 15.314 15.314
2. Attitude towards Knowledge Sharing (AKS) 3.071 9.033 24.347
3. Enjoyment in Helping Others (EHO) 2.080 6.118 30.465
4. Knowledge Self Efficacy (KSE) 1.953 5.743 36.208
5. Subjective Norm (SN) 1.637 4.814 41.022
6. Willingness to Share Knowledge (WSK) 1.438 4.231 45.253
7. Attitude to Learn (AL) 1.399 4.115 49.368
8. Use of ICT 1.210 3.559 52.927
9. Organisational Support to Share Knowledge 1.146 3.372 56.299
10. Organisational Culture 1.060 3.119 59.418

Fig. 1: Scree Plot
7. Factors Determining the Knowledge Sharing Practices of Graduate Students
Table 3 presents the total variance explained by each component. The number of factors that
contributed Eigenvalue greater than one was only significant and remaining was disregarded
(cf. Hair et al., 2006; Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007). The items have been converged into 10
components. These components together explain 59.418% of the knowledge sharing practices
of graduate students. These factors are named accordingly and they are described below.
7. 1. Willingness to Learn (WL)
An important aspect of knowledge sharing is donating or dissemination of knowledge. For
disseminating knowledge, the individual has to learn. Hence, there must be a willingness and
positive attitude toward learning. A large number of items have been loaded on this factor
(Eigenvalue = 15.314). Attitude and willingness to learn play a significant role in the
knowledge sharing practices of graduate students.
7.2. Attitude towards Knowledge Sharing (AKS)
Attitude has long been shown to influence behavioural intentions (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980).
The knowledge sharing practices of students are influenced by their attitude toward
knowledge sharing. A good number of items have been loaded on this factor and it
contributes 9.033% variance to the organizational stress of teachers (Eigenvalue = 3.071).
7.3. Enjoyment in Helping Others (EHO)
Osterloh and Frey (2000) have argued that knowledge sharing activity is motivated by one’s
own intrinsic motivations. Wasko and Faraj (2000) have also demonstrated that individuals
are intrinsically motivated to contribute their knowledge because they enjoy helping others.
As knowledge sharing behaviour helps other members of a society to solve their problems, a
member who enjoys helping other members is likely to harbour a positive attitude toward
knowledge sharing (Kankanhalli et al., 2005). This factor contributes 6.118 % of variance
(Eigenvalue = 2.09).
7.4. Knowledge Self Efficacy (KSE)
Self-efficacy is a potentially important factor influencing the decision to share knowledge
(Bock and Kim, 2002; Hsu et al., 2006; Kankanhalli et al., 2005). If individuals are confident
in their ability to share knowledge, then they would be likely to perform the behaviour
(Bandura, 1994). Hence, knowledge self-efficacy is a significant element determining the
knowledge sharing practices of graduate students. It contributes 5.743% of the variance in the
knowledge sharing practices of graduate students (Eigenvalue = 1.953).
7.5. Subjective Norm (SN)
According to Azjen and Fishbein’s theory of planned behaviour (Azjen and Fishbein, 1980),
one of the determinants of an intention to perform an action is the subjective norm of the
individual, that is, the perceived pressures from the immediate social environment towards
the action. People will be more inclined to perform a certain behaviour if they feel that
important referent individuals are likely to approve and even applaud such behaviour. Kuo
and Young (2008) observed that subjective norms along with attitude describe the person's
intention to share the knowledge. It contributes 4.814% of the variance in the knowledge
sharing practices of graduates students in Kerala.

7.6. Willingness to Share Knowledge (WSK)
The willingness of the individuals is an important factor which influences the knowledge
sharing practices. This is especially important when knowledge sharing is voluntary in nature.
This factor contribute 4.231% of variance (Eigenvalue = 1.438).
7.7. Attitude to Learning (AL)
Attitude toward learning of the learners contributes significantly to their knowledge sharing
practices. This factor contribute 4.115% of variance (Eigenvalue = 1.399). Those having a
high attitude towards learning usually exhibit a positive attitude towards knowledge sharing
(Areekkuzhiyil, 2016)
7.8. Use of ICT
In the present technologically mediated society, use of technology plays a significant role in
the knowledge sharing practices of graduate students. This factor contribute 3.559% of
variance (Eigenvalue = 1.210). Various ICT devices and technologies are facilitating the
knowledge sharing practices of graduate students.
7.9. Organisational Support to Share Knowledge
Organisational support refers to the extrinsic and intrinsic reward and motivation to share
knowledge. An effective reward system is essential in order to motivate individuals to share
knowledge because, in the absence of proper motivation, some may be unwilling to share
knowledge. This factor contributes 3.372% variance to the knowledge sharing practices of
graduate students.
7.10. Organisational Culture
The culture of the organisation plays a very important role in building a knowledge sharing
environment. The culture of the organization provides strong support for building knowledge
sharing among the people of the organization. De Long and Fahey (2000) consider that
organizational culture plays a fundamental role in the creation, sharing and use of knowledge.
They state that one of the major ways in which culture influences knowledge management
practices is by establishing norms regarding sharing knowledge. A second way in which
organizational culture influences knowledge sharing is by creating an environment of caring
and trust that is so important for encouraging individuals to share with others. It contributes
3.119% of the variance in knowledge sharing practices of graduate students.

Organisational Culture
Attitude and
Organisational Support to
Willingness to Learn
Share Knowledge
Attitude towards
Knowledge Sharing Use of ICT
KSP
Enjoyment in Attitude to Learn
Helping Others
Willingness to Share
Knowledge Self Subjective
Knowledge
Efficacy Norm
x
Fig.2: Factors determining the Knowledge Sharing Practices among Under Graduate Students
in Kerala
8. Conclusion
The study reveals that the knowledge sharing practices of graduate students are determined
by different factors. It involves personal factors and organisation related factors. These
factors together explain 59.418% of the knowledge sharing practices of graduate students.
By facilitating these factors, the knowledge sharing practice of graduate students can be
enhanced.
9. References
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social
behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Ardichvili, A., Maurer, M., Li, W., Wentling, T., & Stuedemann, R. (2006). Cultural
influences on knowledge sharing through online communities of practice. Journal of
Knowledge Management, 10(1), 94-107.
Areekkuzhiyil, Santhosh. (2016). Impact of Organisational Factors on the Knowledge
Sharing Practices of Teachers working in Higher education Sector. Intercontinental
Journal of Human Resource Research Review. Vol. 4 (3), pp. 84-94.
Areekkuzhiyil, Santhosh. (2016). Knowledge Sharing Practices and Quality of Work Life
among Teachers of Higher Education. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Calicut.
Areekkuzhiyil, Santhosh. (2016). Organizational Culture as Determinant of Knowledge
Sharing Practices of Teachers Working in Higher Education Sector. International
Journal of Management and Social Science Research Review (IJMSRR), Vol.1 (26), pp.
24-30.
Azudin, Norizzati, & Ismail, Mohd & Taherali, Zainab. (2009). Knowledge sharing among
workers: A study on their contribution through informal communication in Cyberjaya,
Malaysia. Knowledge Management & E-Learning : an International Journal.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human
behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press.
Bock and Kim, (2002). Breaking the myths of rewards: an exploratory study of attitudes
about knowledge sharing, Information Resources Management Journal, 15(2), pp. 14–
21.
Bock, G.W., Zamud, R.W., Kim, Y.G., & Lee, J.N. (2005). Behavioral intention formation in
knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological
forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 87-111.
Bosua, R. and Scheepers, R. (2007). Towards a model to explain knowledge sharing in
complex organizational environments, Knowledge Management Research & Practice,
Vol. 5(2), pp.93-109.
Brown, J. S. and Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and Organization: A Social Practice
Perspective. Organization Science. 12(2), 198–213.
Bures, V., 2003.Cultural barriers in knowledge sharing.E + M Economics and Management,
6, 57-62.
Christensen, P.H. (2007). Knowledge Sharing: Moving Away from the Obsession with Best
Practices, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol.11(1), pp.36-47.
Davenport T and L. Prusak. (2000). Working Knowledge: Managing What Your
Organisation knows. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis
(6th ed.). N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hogel, M., Parboteeah, K.P. and Munson, C.L. (2003), Team-level antecedents of
individuals’ knowledge networks, Decision Sciences, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 741-70.
Hsu, M.-H., Yen, C.-H., Chiu, C.-M., & Chang, C.-M. (2006). A longitudinal investigation of
continued online shopping behavior: An extension of the theory of planned
behavior. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64, 889- 904.
Islam, M.Z., Ahmed, S.M., Hasan, I., & Ahmed, S.U. (2011). Organizational culture and
knowledge sharing: Empirical evidence from service organizations. African Journal
of Business Management, 5(14), 5900-5909.
Jo, S.J. (2011). Knowledge sharing: The influences of organization culture, organizational
commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Leadership and
Organizational Studies, 18(3), 353- 364.
Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B., Wei K., (2005). Contributing Knowledge to Electronic Knowledge
Repositories: An Empirical Investigation, Special Issue on Information Technologies
and Knowledge Management, MIS Quarterly, 29(1), pp.113-144.
Kharabshesh, R.A. (2008). A model of antecedents of knowledge sharing. Electronic Journal
of Knowledge Management, 5(4), 419-427.
Kuo, F. Y., & Young, M. L. (2008). Predicting Knowledge Sharing Practices through
Intention: A Test of Competing Models. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 2697-
2722.
Ladd, A. & Ward, M. (2002).An investigation of environmental factors influencing
knowledge transfer. Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, 4.
Ladd, A., & Ward, M. (2002).An investigation of environmental factors influencing
knowledge transfer. Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, 4.
Lin, H.F. (2007). Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: An empirical study.
International Journal of Manpower, 28(3/4), 315-335.
Logan, D. (2006). Knowledge Management is Critical to Organizing and Accessing a
Company's Intellectual Assets. Retrieved from http://www.gartner.com.
Malhotra, Naresh. (2007). Marketing Research: an applied approach: 3rd European
Edition, Harlow, UK. Pearson Education.